Handcuffs are used by various parties, such as law enforcement officers, corrections, security, military, and the like, to restrain an individual for any reason, such as suspicion of a crime, a potential for physical violence, uncertain mental health conditions, under the influence of a substance, and the like. Such restraint is necessary to maintain control of the subjects and to prevent the subject from possibly escaping or causing injury to others or themselves. Standard handcuffing protocol sets forth that the subject be handcuffed with his/her hands behind his/her back for many reasons. One reason for positioning the hands behind the back of the individual is that it may improve the safety of others or themselves by limiting the movement and mobility of the individual. Another reason is to prevent the individual from attempting to pick the lock mechanism while placing or holding a key or picking device in his/her mouth. Still, another reason for handcuffing behind the back is that this position may make it more difficult for the individual to attempt to defeat or pick the lock with any object that he/she may have access to (e.g., a stationary sharp or pointed object) or to try to break the attachment or connection between the two handcuffs. Yet, another reason, is that such position may prevent the individual from having a visual or view of the location of a lock or keyhole on the handcuff, thus making lock manipulation or picking more difficult. Additionally, subjects are more limited when their hands are placed behind their back. The subject's ability to run and general mobility and use of their hands/arms are all limited. Typically, the keyhole or lock is exposed on the “up” side of the handcuff away from the individual's fingers. Having one-sided access to the lock or keyhole makes it more difficult for the individual to access the keyhole. For example, it may be more difficult for the individual to place or position an object in or around the keyhole when it is located on the “up” side. That is, the “up” side of the handcuffs is more obstructed by the individual's wrists, arms and/or body whereas the “bottom” side placement is only obstructed by his/her fingers.
While conventional handcuffs have proven satisfactory, the locks of these traditional handcuffs are vulnerable to unauthorized opening because (i) they may be picked by one who has access to a picking device; (ii) it is possible for the lock to be opened by one who has gained unauthorized access to a key; (iii) they could be opened by forcefully jarring or pressing down on the locking plate when the handcuffs are not double locked, (iv) handcuffs, regardless of type, generally utilize a universal key, which could be carried by any individual, and (v) some models of handcuffs include keyholes on both sides, allowing the restrained individual to access the key opening more easily. Because prior art locking mechanisms locate the locks in the middle of the handcuff assembly (i.e., at a base portion of each handcuff in the handcuff assembly), between the handcuff shackles, an individual wearing the handcuff assembly may be able to reach the lock with his/her fingers or with a key or pick device in his/her mouth and proceed to pick or open the lock(s). The proximity of the locks to the individual's fingers poses an immediate possible threat to the safety of the personnel responsible for the control and custody of the individual, and ultimately to the safety of the general public. This threat can be at least partially minimized by orienting the handcuffs so that the lock keyhole to the locks is oriented away from the wearer's fingers. However, determining such orientation without a distinctive orientation feature is difficult when the handcuffs are applied in a stressful environment such as at initial apprehension of a suspected perpetrator.
Another contributing element enabling the individual restrained by the handcuffs to access the lock keyholes is the design, length and flexibility of the intermediary segment retaining the two bracelet sections attached to one another. The intermediary segment needs to be flexible enough to provide a reasonable amount of limited movement to the individual's wrists and arms to ensure comfort while providing safety to the law enforcement personnel. The greater the flexibility of the intermediary segment, the higher the risk for escape.
Accordingly, there has arisen a need to provide in a handcuff of this type additional protection against picking or opening the handcuff lock.
The death or injury of law enforcement operators is unfortunate, especially when due to a prisoner “picking” handcuffs or to handcuff restraint malfunction, or gaining access to a key. In 2002, two Tampa, Fla. detectives were investigating a suspect when the suspect escaped his handcuffs and murdered the detectives. The suspect was carrying his own handcuff key. This suspect later hijacked a truck, killed a pursuing Florida Highway Patrol (FHP) Officer, and then, after a hostage standoff, the suspect killed himself. If the suspect had not escaped his handcuffs, then the three law enforcement operators might be alive today. Accordingly, law enforcement operators have a need for more secure handcuffs that are quickly deployed to secure about the wrists of a suspect as well as handcuffs that are less susceptible to picking and/or malfunction.